Chuck Yerkes wrote: > Virus scanning can/should be done on reciept of email...
Yep, except there are situations where it would be nice to put restrictions in qpopper... If sendmail etc scans for known virus strings you may still want to give some accounts the option of more stringent tests, e.g. using heuristics (that may sometimes give false positives) or restrictions like no executable content (whether it carries a known virus or not). The restrictions on spam or anything remotely spam-like would be another example (bounce stuff we know to be spam on receipt, irrespective of destination, block mail later for some users that elect more sensitive filters (that might reject valid email). The way spam and viruses are going people will need tests that are so sensitive to suspicious activity that they will risk losing good mail, so a simple per-user procmail filter isn't the answer. Something like a filter in qpopper yet with suspicious mail still available via some web-mail interface (which tends to be virus-safe and a quick way of looking at the messages waiting). So I can see some benefit in qpopper being able to call out to a filter and substitute a system-generated explanatory message depending on the filter's findings. Mark Aitchison -- phone:(064)3-364-5888 /\/\ _/\ /\ fax: (064)3-364-5835 _/ \/ ^ \/\,__ System Administrator at: Plain Communications ====<A "mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]";>======
